WAITARA LEVEL CROSSING

Taranaki Daily News, 5 October 1929, Page 5

WAITARA LEVEL CROSSING

ITS ELIMINATION TO PROCEED COUNTY AGREES TO CONTRIBUTE. DEPUTATION WAITS ON COUNCIL. \ Consideration of the proposed contributions by the local bodies concerned to the cost of the work of eliminating the Waitara level crossing wag given by the Clifton County Council yesterday, and after it had met a deputation of representatives of the Taranaki County Council and the boroughs of New Plymouth and Waitara the council’s previous resolution declining to agree to the suggested contributions ’ was rescinded and a motion agreeing to “stand in” and pay their share of the cost was passed. The proposal made by the Railway Department was that if 5 per cent, of the cost of the work was contributed from the heavy traffic fees collected by all local bodies in the province and 10 per cent, found by the counties of Clifton and Taranaki and the boroughs of New Plymouth and Waitara, the Government would find the remaining 85 per cent, of the cost and would proceed with the work at once, giving it prior consideration over other crossings for which'help was not given. A conference of representatives of the local bodies concerned held in New Plymouth had recommended that each of the four bodies contribute one fourth of the 10 per cent., or approximately £lOO each. Broaching the matter upon receipt of a memorandum outlining the decisions of the conference of local body representatives, the chairman said he was still of the same opinion as before, that the undertaking was more the work of .the Highways Board or of the Railway Department than of local bodies. The onus of having the work carried out would fall on the county, and he did not think the allocatiori of a quarter of the 10 per'cent, of the cost to each ’ local body a fair one. On a population . or a valuation basis the county should not have to find anything like the £l9O suggested. Cr. C.- H. Barnitt; If we contribute to this crossing we are going to be roped in for a lot more. The engineer (Air. N. C. Fookes) explained no more crossings would be eliminated in Taranaki for the present. Cr. J. F. Phillips: We’ll be the chop- • ping block. ■ Cr. Barnitt: We must look at it with a broader view. It does not seem fair that one county should block the work. Cr. W. H. Watson.- There are worse crossings in Taranaki and many worse places even away from . the railway?? They are trying to make it so that a man. can go along asleep at the wheel without any responsibility at all. Every corner in the back roads is worse than that crossing. When the deputation which consisted of Messrs. J. S. Connett (Taranaki County Council), J. Brown (New Plymouth Borough Council), and E. A. George (Waitara Borough Council), was introduced Mr, Connett outlined the proposal on the same lines as he had done at the conference held previously, and asked the county to give it further consideration. He added that after the conference Air. H. W. Beasley, district railway engineer, had assured him the department was not nearly so keen to do away with crossings as it had been before, and he thought the Government would quickly drop the whole thing if united support was not forthcoming. No one was more jealous of the ratepayers’ interests than he, but he thought this crossing on a No. 1 highway should be eliminated while there was a chance. | Mr. Connett's remarks were endorsed by Messrs. Brown and George. When the matter was first considered it was contended it was a question for the department and, to a lesser extent, the board, said the chairman of the county council, Air. H. A. Foreman, in reply. Had all the local bodies stood out against the proposal he thought the board would eventually have carried out the work. The county had many callfl upon it for money and at the time there was a deputation outside waiting to ask the council to cut back corners on some of the back roads. The council would reconsider the matter. Air. Connett emphasised, that many crossings were being dealt with by wigwag signals, many of which could be installed for the price of one overhead bridge, and therefore the opportunity i should be taken while it existed. There was talk of passenger traffic beinw conveyed to Lepperton Junction by buses, said Cr. Barnitt. If that were true there was going to be even Jcgs need for the elimination of the crossing. Mr.’ George: The department would not offer to find 85 per cent, of the i- cost of the work if it were contemplating doin« away with the traffic on the hue. ■ After the deputation had withdrawn the chairman said it appeared that if the proposal were turned down the work would never be done. He had been against it but it was an important job. said Cr. Barnitt. It was clear that all the other bodies would contribute if they, did, and they should look at it in a broad-minded manner. It wa« something of a dog- '■ in-the-manger attitude to adopt not to agree to contribute equally with the others. ‘ if